A clause giving the payee bank the right to appropriate to the payment of the note, before or after maturity, the amount on deposit by the makers or either of them, does not make the amount due uncertain.1 But a clause giving the holder power to sell certain collateral security before maturity and apply the proceeds to the note has been held to make the amount uncertain.2 So provision for the payment of uncertain sums at uncertain times before maturity, leaving uncertain the amount due at maturity, destroys negotiability,3 since it leaves the amount to be paid at maturity uncertain.

North Dakota. Flagg v. School District, 4 N. D. 30, 25 L. R. A. 363, 58 N. W. 499.

2 Bullock v. Taylor, 39 Mich. 137, 33 Am. Rep. 356.

3 Haslach v. Wolf, 66 Neb. 600, 103 Am. St. Rep. 736, 60 L. R. A. 434, 92 N. W. 574.

4 Kansas. Clark v. Skeen, 61 Kan. 526, 78 Am. St. Rep. 337, 49 L. R. A. 190, 60 Pac. 327.

Michigan. Smith v. Kendall, 9 Mich. 241, 80 Am. Dec. 83.

Minnesota. Hastings v. Thompson, 54 Minn. 184, 40 Am. St. Rep. 315, 21 L. R. A. 178, 55 N. W. 968.

Nebraska. Haslach v. Wolf, 66 Neb.

600, 103 Am. St. Rep. 736, 60 L. R. A. 434, 92 N. W. 574,

Wisconsin. Morgan v. Edwards, 53 Wis. 599, 40 Am. Rep. 781, 11 N. W. 21.

1 Walker v. Thompson, 108 Mich. 686, 66 N. W. 584; Coolidge v. Salt-marsh, 96 Wash. 541, 165 Pac. 508.

2 Smith v. Myers, 207 111. 126, 69 N. E. 858 [affirming, 107 111. App. 410].

3 Coolidge v. Salt marsh, 96 Wash. 541, 165 Pac. 508.

4 Coolidge v. Saltmarsh, 96 Wash. 541, 165 Pac. 508.

1 Louisville Banking Co. v. Gray, 123 Ala. 251, 82 Am. St. Rep. 120, 26 So. 205 [citing, Hodges v. Shuler, 22 N. Y. 114].